we have a national health-care system. one of the good things about having the national health care system is because we are a charitable organization and have not had every cancer patient for the last 20-odd years boeing three units that we provide. that is why we can get the figures of the benefits. you could correlate the numbers. the trust unit have the survival rate, and this was the same amount. >> have any cancer center said all right they are not interested? -- said outright they are not interested in a teenage cancer center? >> no, i do not think so. i do not think there is like to be a problem.

>> are there any lights that teenage america have help? >> we literally only have ucla up and running for the past, even now they are still refurbishing building in the communal area, so it is still under construction. i have not a man of -- the idea of those things come and go. after going to duke, i went to yale. i went into three separate rooms, three teenage boys. another one of his last treatment.

i cannot remember exactly what. his hair was all gone. there was another boy in isolation. unfortunately i could not visit him because i was on a really tight schedules. there they were, three boys. none of them knew they were next door to each other. they are proposing to implement a program, starting with an outpatient program. they get it. it is just a a matter of juggling balls and giving them the right place. >> have you found the social media platform like twitter has led them to york ucla program? >> i did not do it. i do not go on any of those things. they terrify me. [laughter]

i will keep my books. there is no doubt obviously it will. teens are wonderful community. all of those things will help tremendously. the we offer a social media class this, so he need help, we will be happy to help you. what is the number one type of cancer facing teenagers today? >> i will leave that to dr. taylor. >> thank you. before i answer that question, i just want to say, isn't it remarkable to see someone you might not expect to be so

passionate and particulate and knowledgeable about a subject? it is inspirational. [applause] their enthusiasm is crudely contagious. -- truly contyagagious. the issue of the types of cancer, it runs a gambit, but there are many cancer that young people and young adults conference. leukemia, lymphoma, sarcoma, a germ cell tissues, testicular and ovarian cancer, by rick cancer, brain tumor, carcinomas. they are relatively rare, and they are profound for the individuals because of the age and issues that surround such a diagnosis. >> you might need to stay for this one. [laughter] is your program also supporting

cancer research? >> absolutely. i think one of the great benefits to developing dedicated units on behalf of teenagers and young people is you encourage clinical trials. clinical trials are very important in order to move the ball further down the road in terms of successful treatment and survival. there are all sorts of issues that come into play that are unique on behalf of teenagers answers. the psychosocial aspect are dramatic. infertility issues. i have forgotten the actual question. >> is the research?

>> absolutely. i should say at the outset that here in america, we are already under way and have wonderful on colleges who were not just clinicians, but advocates for this group. they're doing wonderful work. there is a ground swell to address this, that we need more research, we need more clinical data. i think such units provide an opportunity to be able to do that, because you are able to dedicate and organize people in a way we have never had before. it opened up greater number of patients to research. it powers our ability to get there -- gather data. in naples us to perform registry's in order to collect data. -- it enables us to perform registry's in order to collect data. >> is team cancer more prevalent

in europe than in the usa? >> it is very difficult to get numbers from the west. in britain every day there are six teenagers who get the bad news. and based on our figures in using your population, it would be about 30 per day, 30 families per day that are going through hell. notour system there's anything like a teenager. there are children, and after the age of 12, they are adults. when you ask about if we will do any research, it is the fact that we have a group that you can study, and then you would focus the madison.

you will learn more about the cancers. and america, they do not exist. your numbers are all heaped together. apparently at the moment there are 70,000 per year it must be 30. >> is it easier to do clinical trials on teenagers and young children? are the ethical issues lower? >> i believe it is more difficult to give -- to do the research. they tend to be underinsured. they tend to sometimes have no insurance. love it or hate it, the patient for protection and affordable care act may change that because it gives us the opportunity to ensure young people up to the age of 26 here in the united states. that will afford an opportunity to bring those young people in it so they can have access to such medical care.

they are more difficult group. they tend to feel invincible. they tend to go to doctors less. when they do go, the last thing on the doctor's mind that might be the notion that this young person has developed cancer. there are very few risk factors that have been identified. a very profound diagnoses, and one that is actually quite rare. another point about teenagers and young adults with cancers are the issues of survivorship, because what happens once they're treated for the cancer? there are issues they carry with them.

issues of recurrence of the disease, issues of fertility. interruption to their social life, careers, education. these are all major issues that are rather unique to this age groups. >> do american patient privacy laws prevent implementation of the communal aspects of the teenage program? >> no, anymore than it does for adults, hospitals or children's hospitals. we are all aware by this the issues, but i do not think it would have any bearing. >> do you have a relationship with st. jude's hospital? seen jews in memphis. -- st. jude's in memphis. >> not at the moment, but we would like to. philadelphia is looking very hopeful. in the, what i would like to say, is we could not have stage this today without quite a lot

of money and sponsorship. my heart really goes out to thank mayor went in british airways for sponsoring this today. thank you very much. [applause] >> i believe we have a young lady who we are all sitting talking about what teenagers need, and she has been gone through -- has been treated at ucla. she will give us an idea of exactly what this program will mean. >> i just want to thank everyone for being here today. i want to thank the whole board

for including me and getting involved in such a great cause. i want to acknowledge my new friend hunter back there. [applause] fellow cancer survivor as well. we both had brain tumors. at this time three years ago i was a sophomore in high school and was not able to attend the school because two months prior to that i had been diagnosed with stage 1 brain cancer. all five medicines may be so tired and be with my friends. i could not stay awake long enough. i am an only child. i was at home alone most of the time. i did my class is on line to keep up with high school, but it was very long way. i have no one to talk to during the day. i was just there by myself. during that time are required to doctors' appointments,

sometimes up to three times per week about an hour away. there were all of this is designed for pediatric care. i was 15 at the time and did not consider myself pediatric. i did not care for the room- visiting musical clowns. they would come in dressed up while i was being tested. i was like really? my mom said she will never forget the look on my face when they walked in, something like that. then i was then i see you and hon surgery to remove my brain tumor. i was and i see it one night. there was a screaming baby next door. i felt bad for the baby. it did not want to be there anymore than i did. it was not the baby or the clowns fault, i was the one who

did not belong there. the only problem with the plan, is the place i did a long did not exist yet. teen cancer american -- america unit are hospital wards designed specifically for teenagers and has an emphasis on independence area and shortly after i was diagnosed i was so eager to find someone who was going through iron -- going through what i was. i read an article about a local high school football player that was diagnosed with a brain tumor. i reached out through him through the wonders of the internet. he was gracious enough to write back to me. we wrote a little bit of back- and-forth about his journey and what he went through. i learned a little bit about it. it was nice to know i was not

the only one in the state of georgia that has a brain tumor. irt felt better knowing i was not the only one. i realized that most teenagers would not go out seeking that kind of support. i consider myself quiet, but in some ways a very outgoing. that is where this comes in. by putting these patients together, they do not have to seek the emotional support. it is in the common rooms, kitchens where they can cook together. they have shown to have beneficial effects as well. when you are have an emotional help that is better, this will help will be better. being a survivor of 2.5 years,

i firmly believe in that. if i did not have the support i have, i do not think i would be here today. i hope you'll join us in supporting them as well. [applause] >> thank you, sarah. >> thank you for sharing your story. i want to echo what dr. taylor said. i think many of you were excited to see there were speaking at the press club and did not realize what they're called was and how passionate their work. i believe they have information to find out more about it. i do not want to let roger off the hook yet, because it still have a stack of questions for him. we will get back to the q&a. i thought i would start with how you compare the rock and

roll music of today compared with the '60s and '70s? >> would you like to answer this, pete? [laughter] >> i am so moved, i do not know that i can answer any questions. and that was so amazing. i am very proud of my small part in teen cancer. he was my doctor, too, so i rose right there in the beginning. that was fantastic. i didn't know you could make any sense either. [laughter] there are at least four or five

sentences that i understood. i am so moved. it was extraordinary. what was the question again? [laughter] >> what is the difference between today's rock music and the classic '60s and '70s -- but these and '60s? >> of course they're not better. what is interesting is the continuing in our music. roger talks about teenagers. our demographic is certainly not teenagers anymore, though there are teenagers that like our music. sometimes they like it for strange reasons because grandparents and parents have been planning it in the background or have boast -- forced them to go to a concert. the continuance of course is the teenager we all carry inside of us, could be the child we are carrying inside of us in my case.

popular music -- we were talking earlier about the fact that you loved to dance to swing music, the music of my father's generation, which i grew up with. i saw that music as popular when i was a young man. there is a continuing there, too. in a sense, it is all the same. classic rock is a term invented by radio deejays in order to sell advertising. it has very little to do with music. >> who are some of the artist that influence your music? -- artists that influenced your music? >> right back to the beginning, elvis. the first guy i thought of the best job in the world. i never thought i could

actually do it. he just sang in a way that was go free and would throw his head back and roar. and i thought, i could do that. motown, james brown, you name it. so much music. of course, hank williams. i parents used to play a lot of hank williams. that is it. >> the same. my upbringing was made into a world -- i am sure roger heard this music, but i was made to sit and listen to sinatra, of duke ellington, and when you heard ella fitzgerald sing, nobody has ever come close to her.

in a sense, every young singer of the day has to be compared to her. later artists like aretha franklin, and then when i started to listen to the blues. hallie wolf. roger does a great howling wolf. probably not. now using like a bird. and the guitar player is an extraordinary guitar player. often these guys in the background. i have trained to listen to the background. we share a lot of stuff.

i would not call myself a musicologist. i would say i did not have any barriers whatsoever. i listened to everything. on the plane last night i was listening to niketti as i ate my spaghetti. [laughter] >> how did you all meet and decide to form a band? >> i had a band way back. i used to have to make my guitar because we were not wealthy at all it could not afford one. i had a band -- every street kind of had a band. i got kicked out of school on my 15th birthday. i started working for a living. one day i am walking home from work and bought into another guy who looks suspicious. it was a base.

-- a bass. i noticed john and pete, because we want to the same school, even though we were a year longer. they just had something about them. i asked him if he was and a band. she said -- he said are you getting paid? i said no. he said we are. of course i was not telling the truth. he joined, and later on he

introduced peek into the band. the band and they were in there were playing more does that rock-and-roll. -- there were playing more rock and roll. to me, pete is the most original great guitarist. totally original. [applause] >> what is the role of the major labels when that is not possible for recording artists to self published for the fan base? >> this is a real shit heap. there are so many wonderful things about the internet and digitization of music and photographs and information and images and everything, but as much as the record industry they have exploited teenagers,

exploited country music stars, took the music and did not pay royalties or whatever, one thing they always did was to give an artist a fair crack to allow them to have a hit, this, another mess, and then another hit and then another missed. some guy in the record company had seen a great band and a nightclub, went back and told whoever is in charge that this is the guy you should find. i am afraid none of the digital music parasites and vampires that exist give money to developing artist. this is something that really does need to be looked at. [applause] >> do either of you have any

thoughts on the high volume of concert verses the early days? can you hear me now? >> all we can say is just be careful. i have been lucky. pete is still having a bit of trouble. just the careful. what they do not tell you about a hearing, which john found out because he was wearing headphones in the studio and wearing them for eight hours. you turn them up a bit more, a little bit more, and he was regular, and of course, the

vibrate and that is what kids do sound. when you actually lose your hearing, the vibrate in words and do not bounce back. john went up to no. 11, probably 15. he was death the last 10 years of his life. -- he was deaf the last 10 years of his life. you used to have to stand by his cabinet, because he played by feel. he could not hear them. >> how you stay in good enough the scholarship -- shape to perform such current ratios? -- strenuous shows? >> just doing the shows themselves keep you in good shape. i love what i do. i never stop working.

i am always doing something. i suppose i am genetically lucky in that area. it is not easy. i see all these people running and jogging when they are 40- years-old. i think [inaudible] [laughter] >> has the plain microphone ever hit a fan? >> i only ever hit one. i got lucky. i did lose it wants and went through audience but did not hit anyone. it was one that i hit deliberately. he would be called the up not to even be here anymore. we were doing a show with chuck berry. he supported us on the first show. it was that royal all recall.

the same day the stones played the park. we went on stage and started playing, and about 50-100 gathered screaming and shouting and throwing things. what i remember as i saw someone do that and saw to it was. someone just nick to me. but based on all warm. i had blood coming out. it was eclipsed coin he is thrown at me and clipped my eye. he was stuck in the middle of the group. so i just -- [laughter] to make matters worse, i pointed at him. direct shot. [applause] [laughter]

>> could each of you tell me what your favorite venue in the world is to perform? >> there are some amazing places. you know what is really good for rock and roll? really good classical halls. i do not know why that is. a small theater that was built in california. albert hall is not bad. carnegie hall is not bad. seriously, they're not bad for rock. and it is nice to have a good, acoustic place. we tend to play in places that

were built for sport originally. i have wanted someone to build a venue specifically for loud rock music and pop music and where you get a section of volume and a section of excitement without having to pump up with these huge systems to fill places that were billed for sports, ice hockey, and so on. there is not one, no one has felt the venue for our kind of music. >> my favorite place is the theater in nashville, which i had the privilege of playing three years ago. i been asked what is your favorite kid, and i could never answered it. the ryman. i played there that night. there is something about that place, the sound. it was an old church, so it was designed for the sound from the stage.

the spirits that live there on the stage with those that play there and past history. that was the best night i ever had in any hall to play. >> it was great. i was there. [applause] >> i want to remind you of the upcoming luncheon speakers. november 16, chief of naval operations. secondly, i know the who is already really cool, but i'm going to make them cooler because i am presenting them with national press club coffee cups. i am pretty sure you can drink other things other than coffee and make them taste really good. one of the last questions, when was the last time you smashed a guitar, and could use-one at tomorrow's concert, please? -- and could you smash one at tomorrow's concert, please? >> about tomorrow, i do not know that i have never really thought about it too much. if either happens or it does

not. i thought about it a lot when i was a kid because it was an artistic act. but now if i break a guitar is because i have gotten sick of it. one interesting fact, if you are raising money for charity, get your catarrh, give it to me, i break it. it is worth money. [laughter] [applause] >> thank you both for coming today. i would like to think the national press club staff, including the journalism institute for organizing today's event. finally, a reminder you can find more information about the national press club at our website press.org. thank you all, and we are adjourned. >> tomorrow on newsmaker, former minnesota governor tim pawlenty. he became a co-chair of mitt romney's campaign for president.

he talks about the business community's response to the fiscal cliff and his role as the president and ceo of the financial services roundtable. join us for his interview at 10:00 on c-span. >> up next, a discussion on immigration and security along the texas-mexico border with sentatives. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> thank you for being here at the second annual texas tribune festival. we have had some pretty lively discussion so far. these gentlemen are from the texas house of representatives. they are on different sides of the aisles.

commissioner todd staples is the texas agriculture commissioner. state representative from 1995 until 2001. he has held statewide offices for the last five years. who knows what 2014 has in store for him? he launched a website that documents the problems that farmers are having on the texas border. whether it is -- tonight is an issue we will discuss. we have representative henry

cuellar. he went to georgetown. he got a master's in international trade from texas a&m in his home town of laredo. he was elected to congress in 2005. these two gentlemen are former college in the house of representatives. we will see how they come together on border security. what prompted you to get interested in border security? >> it is good to be with you this morning. we visit very frequently. the reason i got involved in this issue is because farmers are being taken off of their property, shot at, intimidated by criminal organizations. they are asking for help. washington is in denial about the threats occurring in texas. our federal agents, our dea, our texas department of public

safety and sheriffs and deputies are doing an admirable job with everything that they have to protect our sovereignty and landowners. when washington is in denial, it sends the wrong message. >> congressman, you have had news conferences in laredo. there is more boots on the ground. there is more money. your brother is a sheriff. what is going on on this side of the border? is it as bad as the commissioner says? >> let me thank you. i appreciate you for allowing us to be here. thank you to todd staples. we were in appropriations in the state house. we are good friends. we will come up with solutions. the american public is frustrated with people pointing fingers and saying one side is

not as good as the other side. todd and i will come up with ideas at the end of this conversation. washington is not in denial. you thank the border patrols, the ice agents. we are seeing more deportations than any time in history. we have doubled the amount of border patrol than what we had. we have 21,500 border patrols. some of them are on the southwest border. over 8,000 of them are here on the texas border. money is coming in from washington. look at what the state of texas has done. $2.3 billion to the state. this is to the state of texas. can we do better? yes. we all have to work together. i want to work with todd to find this.

the border is interesting. i live on the border. my wife and kids love on the border. people have come to the border to take a realistic approach. there are two extremes of their -- one is when two retired generals say this is a war zone. the other extreme is you can look at fbi statistics. you'll see that border areas have less murders. i do not want to get into definitional debate.

we can talk about what spillover is. >> you commented. you work yourself as a sponsor for additional resources. i am grateful for you doing that. you brought us the general report. to say that it is improper to say that there is -- washington

is in denial. to attack two of our nation's senior military professionals, like you did in the congressional hearing, and when they were merely giving their reflection of what is going on based on their decades of experience -- you are dead wrong. i want to follow up with that. here is why washington is in denial -- the president of the united states comes to the state and makes jokes about the safety and security of our country and joking about the border being safer than ever. we have had 140 dead bodies

discovered in the last year alone on two rural texas counties. the statistics are great. no amount of statistics can cover up the bullet holes. >> you say they are not always accurate. what are they not showing up? >> they do not tell the real story. our data covers eight major crime categories. they do not cover drug trafficking. ucr does not cover money laundering, human trafficking, extortion. let us think about this -- we have 1,241 miles between texas and mexico. we have great communities there. 93% of our texas-mexico is on incorporated. and it is rural. that is a reality. >> some of these folks on the videos are saying there is a problem. how do you respond? >> i will not dispute anybody in the video. any personal experience, any feelings about what happened -- i will not dispute them at all. we had that conversation.

we brought in ag folks. we brought in different ranchers from the south texas border area with our law enforcement officials and we asked them to -- what else can we do to work with you? we came up with a series of solutions. i am interested in not paying a picture. i am interested in finding solutions. just to say something about the two retired generals -- i respect our military. all i did was simple. as any individual, i asked a question. i asked -- were you paid to come up with a record when you never came down to talk to anyone about the borders? they did not like that question. i asked if they talked to law enforcement people on the border. i asked them simple questions. if somebody cannot handle the truth -- i was asking them

questions. did you do that? if people get insulted, they can come in and insult the border by saying it is a war zone but you cannot ask some questions as to how they did the study. i am a realist about what is happening on the border. i know what is happening on the border. i have a general idea with what is happening across the river. i sat down with the new president coming in mexico. we have to start with the approach that mexico is not an enemy. start off with that approach. we have to work together with law enforcement. we have to start off working together to protect the border. it is a transnational crime organization that is affecting us.

they are in austin, texas, laredo, washington. they are here. the drug cartels are here. we know this. instead of trying to fight over if is it worse, i want to come up with solutions. >> $85,000 -- is that correct? is it justified? >> we are missing opportunities to secure our border when we go to two of our nation's senior military professionals and ask them to help clear up this issue, and they say that the drug cartels are seeking to get a foothold into the united states of america. they report what law enforcement is saying and that it is a war zone. if you have engaged in gun battles, that is what it is. i will not quibble with them.

mexico is the number one trading partner for the state of texas. we agree how important that legal trade is. it is that legal trade that we seek to preserve. we have a disconnect. california and arizona and new mexico have about 14-plus agents per mile of border now. we have barely over six. we have had a buildup that has put such across through texas. i do want to work with you, congressman. the american people want the truth. they want the truth of what is taking place. people are stepping up and saying that. the truth is there is a runaround. we need those resources. we need parity with our sister states. >> i would be happy to talk to

about how the majority have stopped bills. on this issue, we have to work together, because democrats and republicans -- we had in homeland to add 1000 new border patrols. i do not have to tell you how it went. i voted in favor. once i said no, we said yes. i said -- if you say that the borders are a war zone, why don't we put the border patrol down there at the border? i want to put partisan aside. i want to know -- how do we work together? we sat down with the border patrol and other law enforcement from south texas after your conversation. we sat down with them. we still need to do more.

they set up liaisons. i can give you a complete list of what they're done. robert harris was the chief of commander of border patrol. they have sat down with them. i have lived on a ranch. i understand it. i live on the border. i understand that the border -- if there was a war zone, the border is growing faster percentage-wise than any other parts of the state. i do understand as a realist that there are problems. this is why i fought to bring in new technology. i've got to bring in the uab. fought to bring in the excess equipment from iraq and afghanistan after coming back. we are doing all this. we have to work together.

>> i appreciate your efforts. the message being undermined to allow those new resources to happen in to get what we need when we give mixed messages. last year, you have a press release that said the u.s. has not seen any spillover violence. saying that when we are acknowledging that our law enforcement has been engaged in a gun battle. we have had people killed. narcotics have been caught. that is what is competing this. we need to recognize it for what it is. transnational criminal organizations -- we cannot pursue them across the international border. we will put what ever it takes to defend the sovereignty -- >> he made a point that there

was a bill to fund more border patrol agents. i think it is well-known that republicans in washington do not like to spend a lot of money. his comments were that members of your own party do not want to fund this initiative. >> people are tired of blaming parties. >> that is exactly what i just said. [laughter] before you did that, you blamed republicans. [talking over each other] >> i acknowledge that president bush and president obama have increased the number of border patrol. i acknowledge that we have an increase of resources. when you have a disparity of resources in other states, it pushes the traffic across the border to make it worse. we need to come together.

>> let us do it. >> we have a terrible problem. people get a mixed message. it is not ok. >> my position is simple -- i do not like people calling it a war zone. i have big brothers that are peace officers. one is a border sheriff. he used to do narcotics and intelligence. i know the reality of what is happening out there. at the same time, this is texas. it does not stop at the border. we have to work together. if you want to talk about washington in general, we have the george bush tax cuts that

are about to expire at the end of the year. i have supported them. we have to do a sequestration, which means that we had cut $1 trillion. we have to cut another one $1.2 billion. we are faced with one thing that a lot of people tell us to do -- do not raise our taxes, do not cut our services, and reduce the deficit. it will be very hard. the only way we can do this is by working in a bipartisan way together. i want to work with you just like we did in 2010. we put $600 billion for border security -- the largest amounts ever for border security. it is not only border security but it is other issues that would help us.

immigration reform. i want to thank todd staples publicly for the position on the ag reform. he did it before the republican platform did. >> that effort is a good one. that we are doing at the party level. >> when we talk about border security. it is not what we do at the border but also the policies. look at 2001. we started to have a conversation about national security. the national security came in and they said borders to the south and north have vulnerability. we saw the drug cartels over there. what do we do? we put in more staff. we add the equipment and walls. the terrorists of 9/11 did not come in through the southern

board. they came in through visas and student visas. when we are looking at this conversation of national security, we have some people who have pushed for more restrictive immigration policies. if you want to help with border security, like todd and i, we believe in a full comprehensive immigration reform. we have to figure out what to do with the 12 million undocumented aliens. if you know who comes into work and who goes back, then you can focus their resources on the bad people who are coming in from other regions. this is where one more brick on the ground. >> what is the magic number you would like to see and texas?

how many more votes on the ground? >> i want to clarify one issue -- those terrorists of 9/11 may have not come to the southern border, but we do know that people from afghanistan and pakistan and iran in iraq have been apprehended coming across the border. >> how many? >> there is no simple solution that can solve our border and security. >> we can start out by not claiming the border safer than ever when even people that -- a sheriff would take issue with the texas border website. he acknowledges that south texas is the preferred smuggling route for moving illegal drugs into our county. we need to increase the border patrol votes on the ground. we need to do that by giving us

a minimum -- what california and arizona have. we need to increase the border patrol and continue to fund our local law enforcement. we need to change the rules of engagement for our officials. we need to categorize cartels for what it is -- terrorist activities. go after them in their pocketbooks, and shut them down financially. >> you disagree on a bill. do you still have that opinion? are they terrorists? >> they do create certain things that are considered terrorists acts. we need to put resources for law enforcement. we have been working on that. we are looking at the border. the sheriff does a

the sheriff does a heck of a job. my situation is very simple. i have always pushed for more security on the border. not only making sure that the areas -- we all have to work together. the areas -- we all have to work together. last night when my bills was passed that would call for ordination between the state, local, and federal level. we need to work together. two years ago, the state of texas had a plan to protect the bord. i had a couple of homela security dyes and. -- guys. what is the plan? we should be working together -- state, local, federal.

i understand connections. i want to continue working with todd. what are the solutions? i am still waiting. i want to get ideas and input on how we can work together. >>e agree that we nd to mornize our interests. a tremendous amount of trade comes through on a daily basis. exports and imports is millions of dollars per year. agriculture is 10% of that. >> i'm glad that we are expanding it. >> talk to me about where to put more money. border patrol. do not forget the men and women

at the border. keep in mind that the u.s. and mexico there is $1.2 million to trade. there is 6 million jobs created that have been created because of the trade that we have with mexico. we need to work with mexico. we need to look at how we work with them, especially when w talk about the border. the border is a very dynamic aspect of it. >> recently members of a prominent family were indicted and not convicted yet, but indicted. there have been court cases where it and opeted. u.s. citizens were there. on thoese fros, it does show that the is activity on the border.

take a minute and tell me the level of violence. >> it has been documented. look at the news reports just this last week alone. there has been a former hston police officer that has been indicted on moy-laundering charges. we have a kidnapping case in san antonio last year and an austin there was of cartel. there is a criminal trial that is occurring right now. one of the head cartel henchman is spilling the beans about what is going on. two weeks ago, the special agent in charge of the d.a. in chicago said that he was the number one two weeks ago, the special agent in charge of the d.a. in chicago said that he was the number one criminal in the world. he has a hub in chicago that is

making parts of chicago as violent as mexican border towns today. that is happening in america. that's why it's frustrating for land owners to hear that the border is more secure than ever. >> no one is disagreeing that there are no problems. no one is disputing that. is there a problem? yes. we have spent so much time trying to categorize what the problem is. i am interested in the solutions. how do we get to the solutions themselves? i could give you lots of figures on that. i am interested in the solutions. how do we work together? there is a bill named after an agent that got killed about coordinating the state, local, and federal together. they are here in austin, texas right now.

>> how infiltrated it laredo, texas? >> they're everywhere. it is everywhere. >> you have heard from police. how concerned are they? >> anytime you have a situation in mexico that is very difficult -- you always worry about the spill over. and there are incidents. no one is saying that there are no incidents at all. no one is saying that. the question is -- how do we address this? how are we going to work together? are we going to spend time categorizing the problem? or are we going to figure out, how do we work with intelligence, with our i.c.e. acts? how do we work with the different officials? and the last three years, the united states has appropriated for rehab an education on drugs. $31 million. how do we work --everybody says it is about security. i agree. it is about security.

what about the rehab part? what about also the $25 billion to $30 billion. and there are different figures. i've seen your numbers --of drug consumption that we have here that we send out to mexico? do you know why they are fighting so hard and are coming here to protect the money? because the united states consumes $25 billion worth of drugs. >> commissioner, will that help, addressing the drug addiction problem? >> absolutely. those people that buy illegal drugs are buying bullets to shoot at our law enforcement officers. >> let's talk about guns. texas people like guns and apparently mexicans light guns as well. you can dispute. how many are traced back to the united states. what is wrong if you are not doing any illegal activity with your guns? what is wrong with reporting

multiple sales of high-powered weapons? is there any problem with that? i know it is a second amendment issue. but like i said, if these folks are just purchasing these guns to gsh guns to go hunting, what's the problem with reporting them? >> i think you said it. it is a second amendment issue. >> i believe in the second amendment. the laws are in the books right now to enforce it. put more agents out there. work with the mexicans out there. be smart on how we work. we give them the e-trace. the mexicans when i was down there talking to them say hey, this is great. but there is a little problem. it is in english. we need it in spanish. we need to understand that in the united states we have a second amendment. we can implement it and enforce it.

and we did add a lot for a.t.f. acts out there. >> he mentions the former governor of the mexico state. the new one will be sworn in on december 1. you are very familiar with him. he is a personal friend of yours. what do you see happening in december as far as policy goes? >> i hope they take a strong stand against the mexican drug cartel. i hope that the merida initiative that congress funded between the united states and mexico has a great deal of oversight and accountability in how the dollars are being spent. i hope they have a greater level of cooperation between our law enforcement and mexico's law enforcement. when our enforcement officials and webb, when your officials are chasing a drug lord, i

would like to see mexican authorities on the other side meeting them and giving them no place to hide. that is what i hope is the result of this. we will be watching closely. >> looking at this pragmatically, it did you think there will be a major shift? do you trust mexican law enforcement? >> general mccaffrey -- >> here we go again. >> a four-star general issued a report just this summer. it said the mexican drug cartels are spending $100 million a month bribing law enforcement. and local officials. >> that sounds like you don't trust mexican officials. >>look at the level -- the mexican government is kicking out about 65,000 law enforcement officers in mexico today. there needs to be accountability for what is being done. we expect the best.

and we're going to be inspecting what we expect. >> every few years mexico tries to create a new federal force and tries to dreats problem. do you trust the local enforcement? >> not all of them. we need to start with the basic premise that mexico is a friend and not an enemy. do you agree? >> general mccaffrey praised high on the military. >> let me say this -- >> let's answer the question. [all talking at once] >> let's not get excited. calm down. let me say this -- when you

look at mexico, they have a 2,000 mile border. 1,200 of that is with text -- texas, number one. we know the trade. $1.2 billion per day of trade with mexico. texas is the biggest one. laredo is the largest inland port. when you look at the importance of mexico, the u.s. was assisting mexico with millions of dollars. here we are, this neighbor that is so important to us, we're assisting the. it is a neighbor that is important to us. at the same time, we were giving 25% of -- to egypt, afghanistan. nothing wrong with that, but we need to help our friends to the south. we put in 1.4, i think with additional money, $1.9 billion. for every $1 that we help mexico, they spend $13.

there has been a lot of money on security. we have to understand what they are doing. plan merida where we started off. we did the easy thing. buying helicopters. buying this. i worked with the ambassador. i worked with george bush. i felt stronger about helping mexico. nevertheless, we work together. we did the easy thing with mexico with helicopters and airplanes. the hard thing is we need to start training are building their capacity of prison systems, the judiciary, the prosecutors, the policemen. we're working on it at the federal level. they're trained about 36,000 police. i think they need to have 150,000 men or more than that. we need to go into judges and train them to be prosecutors. did you know that a prosecutor here in the united states, and

-- if he or she wants to get you, they have a 95% chance to get you. in mexico, if a prosecutor were to get you, they have less than a 2% chance. if the police get you a prosecutor that gets you -- the capacity to build will take a long time. we need to have a long-term commitment with mexico to make sure that happens. the difference between the u.s. and mexico in many ways, besides them having a balanced budget and we do not, and our debt growing faster, isour institutions and judges, prosecutors, the law enforcement, we have a much better institution here. we need to help them build up. it will take time. >> is that because cartels pay better than being a mexican judge? >> there is corruption on both sides. if you saw the general inspector, it came out, 1,389

cases that they came up on homeland security. folks over here. is there corruption on both sides? yes. it is the capacity. i think they convicted over 20 off. and they're still going the but as i say, it's the caft. here we have institutions that are stronger. our civil institutions are stronger. over there, when you have weak institutions, the drug cartels can get money and buy off people. not that it does not happen in the u.s., but it certainly happens a lot more over their. >> until we dry up their money train, until their dirty profits are derailed by categorizing it as terrorist activity and bankrupting them, they're still going to have the resourced to do that. talking about mexico being a friend, one of the first things i did was have an exchange program.

texas students and ag students to go live in leon. with the violence that is occurring, we were not able to do much. that is crippling agriculture in many ways. we've got to get hold of it. >> can i just talk about about number four quickly? u.c.r. that is the numbers that the fbi uses to look at crimes that people report. there is another one that i think you are familiar with, the other one has to do, includes kidnappings, home invasions and others thethe fbi is slowly shifting over that area. texas got a federal grant several years ago to do that shift. when i got my fbi briefing, texas was only at 12%. we can start categorizing more numbers.

so we can get what people want. but we've got to remember. we don't want to overload ore law enforcement filling out paperwork like we can -- did with teachers some time ago. i want them out on the street instead of filling out paperwork. but some money there in the state of texas. you can get all the statistics you want. >> two years from now, you may be campaigning for higher offices. when the web site was launched, you had people that were praising you and criticizing you. that you're trying to get a jump on other people that might be running for a higher office in 2014. what are your ambitions? as a border security tied to what you might have to say on the campaign trail? >> this website is tied

directly to the president politicizing this border. going to utep and making these false claims. that's what it is the i've served as a state representative, state senator, elected commissioner of agriculture. and the people of texas, they elected me to solve problems and not to shun them. 2014 has nothing to do with what we need to do to solve these problems. i have been an advocate for land owner rights. this is the greatest usurpation of landowner rights when you have cartel members chasing people offer their properties. that's what it's all about. >> folks, you the lineup at the microphones. real quick, and a round of applause from my colleagues. [applause] did not mention the word general in your question. >> my question is related to something commissioner staples said. people who buy bullets to shoot

-- who buy illegal drurgs basically buying bullets to shoot at border agents. embedded in that statement is that because these drugs are illegal, that is a huge reason why there is so much violence. clearly there is demand. a legal drug purchase, someone mentioned. so why aren't we at least considering legalizing, regulating, and taxing marijuana? it is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, which is legal. >> thank you for the question. it comes up frequently. to assume that legalizing marijuana would not continue the heinous activities that go along with cocaine and meth is not recognizing the cartels as the violent organizations they are.

because drug sales have declined, the have expanded into kidnapping. they have expanded into being one of the biggest copyright violators in moving copyrighted material between our countries. we are dealing with that people who want to inflict harm on any one that stand in their way from making a profit. that is simply not going to solve our problems. it is not a true reflection of the real crime when you have people who are decapitating bodies and hanging them. >> i think we can find other solutions. i do not think that is the right solution. i believe that when kids are young, rehab and education is the best way. that does not include what the states and nonprofits do. keep in mind, this is about to -- all this is fueled by $25 to

$30 billion of illegal drug consumption in the u.s. that is a big market. that is why they are killing each other over there. horrific violence over there. that is what we are seeing. legalizing drugs, i do not believe that. do i believe in guns? yes. >> thank you. a texan who was race the on del rio pass. i come with a special sense of the issue that we were discussing here today. i would like to focus on the distinction between symptoms and causes. the border is certainly porous, and it is porous for people here from mexico without proper documentation. they are here to find work.

they are finding work because we in texas are willing to hire them and pay the money. that is the basic cause. the drug issue is if it were not the fact that we were the market, we are the folks that by the staff. >> is your question about -- -- about the demand for cheap labor, sir? >> from a policy standpoint, what would you do to address those fundamental issues? our consumption of the product and our willingness to hire the people who come here and want to work. >> first of all, thank you. coming from border patrol and law enforcement i really, really want to thank you and for you family for doing that and living on the border, you understand the situation. it is the policy with immigration -- we need an immigration reform bill.

border stroll now double the amount. -- patrol sl now double the amount. if we have a full immigration reform bill, we can let in the people who are coming here to work and we can focus our resources on the bad people who are trying to smuggle or are involved with trafficking. whatever the case might be. we've got to look at that approach. >> people without proper documentation, what do you think? >> well, first, thank you for , and your family for your service in protecting our country. on the issue of illegal drug consumption,i wish hollywood would not glamorize those issues. that would help a whole lot in not sending the wrong message to young people.

on the issue of our field immigration system, it is a contributor. i have been in helicopters overhead and communicating with border patrol on the ground. they don't know whether somebody has an ak-47 loaded or if it's somebody looking for work. our country has relied on guest labor for 60 plus years. we need to solve that problem. you're seeing more proposals. secretaries and commissioners from across the country. some politicize it by wanting to offer citizenship. we tried this in 1986 and it failed. we have a mechanism for becoming a citizen of our country. it's called the naturalization process. let's use that. separate from our workforce needs and i believe we can get something done. >> on the immigration, i have always said that people talk about doing immigration -- the 1986 law was by president reagan and a democratic

congress. i don't believe in amnesty also, myself. i don't. there say way to bring in the 12 million, the undocumented. we can talk about criteria. keep in mind that we can talk about immigration reform. i saw your report. it is a little different. we can work it out. we really can. we can work it out. talk about it. i support immigration reform. maybe not the way it was done in 1986, but we can sit down and work it out. but it's got to be done. >> sir, your question? >> you have law of unintended consequences ever since the last major immigration bill in 1986 you've had the border becoming more secure year after year. it has gotten to the point where the last few years, the cartels have not been able to

ship all of their drugs. they are shipping half of them. they are getting away with shipping half of them. they have been forced to get people in northern mexico addicted so they can sell the surplus to them. >> right. >>as time goes on, they will keep on getting more and more mexicans addicted. i am curious how long the process will continue until mexico says, we're not interested in working with you on the war on drugs the >> sounds like he's asking you to speak for mexican consequences ever since the off don't know if you want to do that. >> yeah, we can't do that. >> that is an excellent point. 80% of all the cocaine that comes into the united states comes from mexico. i just got back with my friend

mike mccall. we saw a cocaine lab. they put in a lot of bad stuff in it. gasoline and acid. a lot of bad stuff. it takes two years for the cocaine to go from central -- from colombia, let's say central mexico to hit the streets of an american city. it takes two years. it's not like the old "millimeter vice" where they take a helicopter and drop it off. it takes two years for the cocaine to get over here. they need to do something with it. they are getting addicted to it. some of the problems that on. americans were seeing, they're seeing that in mexico right now. very good point. this is something on the mexicans and answer and we want to work with them. >> i think the message we are really talking about is that our country needs to stand united.

and express the will to win. we don't want to express the will to maintain the status quo. we do not want to accept a new threshold for violence. where we just accept that the drugs are going to be run through our country. that is not what we want. we will stand united. we will take the steps needed to resolve it. >> i served on the border and intergovernmental affairs. i went to iowa to help our governor in his campaign. i was amazed at how many people would come. they came down as snow birds. they do not come any more. 10 years ago, we went across the border. we bought some stuff and ate dinner. i went back a year-and-a-half ago. they said you can't go across. no, you don't do that. there is a change. it is sad. we went to a restaurant the year before that in mexico. the restaurant used to be a restaurant across the

border. they said we only have 15% of the business that we did. again, they're having to come up to the border. my mother went to del rio. there used to be a restaurant over there that is now on our side. there is an issue. whether it's as real as people think, the one thing general mccaffrey did in his report before this last one, the first one, he said we have to invest in on you of -- one of our major partners here in this hemisphere, with mexico. that is what both of you talked about. how do we invest with them? it takes presidential leadership. i challenge both of you that these next four years, regardless of who the president is, we work together. the solution has been ignored. it has change in the past 10 years. 10 years ago i could go across the border. now i can't. so things have changed dramatically. how do we get the next administration to focus?

which means more boots, which means everything else we've talked about and how do we make that investment with mexico to solve the problem? how do we go with that way? it will take the president to do at the federal government's job, which is to protect the border. >> last question. >> i want to bring up something others have brought up and that is the root causes of the drug problems. what kind of pressure -- you talk about in your discussions about the fact that we are a major consumer of the drug. they're being transported here. the issue comes down to education and parenting and communities. stuff like that. lots of different things. what kind of pressure do you put on other organizations and not as law enforcement and border patrol? organizations outside of that that deal with children who use drugs?

>> it sounds like community efforts make a big difference. and how much pressure can lawmakers put on them? ? they certainly do. we have a host of ills in society today that come about from children who don't have proper instruction from their parents. this is one that's he can aser baited quite dramatically. it's going to take leadership torecognize that article for of the united states constitution says the federal's -- the federal government's responsibility is to protect our borders. the state of texas has spent millions pro teching our borders. we need to have that commitment at all levels. i do not like a $16 trillion dollar deficit. i know you do not either. we need to make certain that

these border security problems are funded first and then solve these other problems the>> at the non-profit and other organizations have done a great job. we need a comprehensive approach for border security. and again, without saying it's only this --quite honestly, let's be real. if the president is a republican, the democrat will complain. the border patrol plan that we have right now is based on president bush. he is a friend of mine. if you have a democratic president, republicans will complain. that is the unfortunate reality. we need to be bipartisan and work together. republicans do not have the best ideas and neither do the democrats. but together, we come up with good ideas.

we need to come up with solutions. i will take any ideas that you might have. but it's comprehensive. representative, thank you. i understand exactly. i live on the other road. you live there for awhile. i never saw you with a flak jacket and helmet reporting for the "morning times." we understand. things have changed. no ifs or buts about it. we understand what is happening there. mexico has changed. it is sad. you can't go up there the way you used to. i was there about a week ago or two weeks ago. an american consulate had a celebration. at this got take ten -- taken there in protected vehicles. those were not the days in

which you could just go out there and have something out there. this is what we are saying. this'll be a long-term commitment with mexico. it is a friend we need to work with. we understand what's happening here. it did not start in the middle of the river. it started in not only mexico but in some other countries. we need to work together, democrats and republicans. it is not a luxury, but a necessity that we all work together. for our own safety. [applause] >> we can certainly start by making certain that bar charts like this that show the buildup in our sister states, that we get the help and support we need. coming up on c-span, we'll talk about the effects of the 2012 election on latin america and immigration policy. later a look at

same-southeastern conference -- same-sex marriage and lgbt issues. >> tomorrow on "washington journal" we'll talk about the republican part and hispanic voters following the 2012 election with carlos girts, the -- gutierrez, the chairman for the steering group. >> the average new facebook user is in india or brazil

right now. they're using a mobile phone to access it because they don't have access to a laptop or p.c. the a lot of americans will meet me and say oh, facebook is great for gossiping and seeing why -- what my friends are eating for lunch. but if you were to talk to? the middle east, say, you would hear a different story, which is that facebook is providing news to people who had unique access to information that they weren't able to get otherwise. you get i much more smeat -- meaty story about what facebook means to them. >> more from chris fox thanksgiving day on c-span. at 2:00, justice john roberts and a look into the supreme court. later, space pioneers and nasa officials pay homage to the first man to walk on the moon,

neil armstrong, just before 11. now a look at the prospects for immigration, trade, and drug policies in the second term of the obama administration. panelists talk about the administration's approach to and cooperation with latin america. this is just over an hour. >> this morning we're going have a conversation, a discussion about the elections, november 6 elections in the united states and what the results may mean for u.s. relations in latin america. the idea really is to have a good exchange and to engage everybody here to talk about what the significance of the outcome might be.

we're going to start with a few opening remarks, and then invite, encourage you to share your perspectives and insights about what the elections might mean. i am joined this morning by three of my colleagues from the inter-american dialogue, peter hakim, the president emeritus and senior fellow at the dialogue who can talk about anything. [laughter] and will talk about anything. anything having to do with latin-american. and also the director of our program remittances and development and also writes as an expert on immigration issues

and will share some thoughts about that and other questions. and margaret myers who directs the dialogues program on china and latin america. china is also going through a transition and china's economy is extremely important for many latin american countries, increasingly so, and she is going to share some thoughts about what that relationship might look like. we're delighted to have margaret with us as well. margaret just came back from about a month in china, so i think we will have some fresh perspective and insight about the situation there, obviously, people interested in america, what is happening in china and the united states, two a very important players. let me begin with a few

comments before turning it over to my colleagues and opening up to all of you. last april, the dialogue produced a policy report that reflected the analysis and recommendations of the members of the inter-american dialogue, and we talked about opportunities in the areas of trade and energy and other global affairs that really should be taken advantage of by the united states moving forward. but we have to -- we emphasize as well there are three issues that were on an old agenda that had not been resolved and stood in the way of more productive relationship between the u.s. and latin america. these issues were drugs, cuba, and immigration. the first two issues were important at the summit of the americas. the report was released right before the summit of the americas.

the first two issues were raised at the summit. the presidents gave a mandate to the organization of american states to study the drug issue. and also the president made it clear there would not be another summit or unlikely another summit unless there was cuban participation in the summit. those issues certain were prominent. i think the election results had interesting implications for all three of these. perhaps the most important is the last one, immigration, which was not on the summit agenda. i think it has raised some expectations that this may be a real opportunity and moment to pursue more serious reform on the immigration system, largely thanks to the significant latino vote, which i guess is the big story coming out of the election and how crucial it was nationally, especially in the

real critical swing states, which made the difference in the election. clearly, it is not the only issue that is important for latinos, but it is important that it has symbolic meaning as well. i am not sure why this is been such a great surprise to some money. -- to so many. it seemed like it was pretty clear this was a trend that was pretty evident, but people seem to be very surprised and shocked that all of the sudden latino population, hispanic population is playing a significant role in exercising enormous influence. that turnout in this election coupled with president obama is move on sort of a dream act light several months ago, also makes one more hopeful that something may happen this time besides avoiding a fiscal cliff, immigration reform is frequently mentioned as a very high priority for the second

term of the obama ministration. it will not be easy. we all know that. this is not a slam dunk. this depends on a lot of dynamics within the republican party. they're still a lot of opposition, resistance to that, and this will have to watch closely. clearly, there seems to be more space and more of an opportunity to do something serious on this issue, which we alluded to in our report than before. the second issue, cuba, it is also striking that i think president obama won about half the cuban vote in florida and also won florida by more than 70,000 votes. i think that reveals the politics with the cuban-american community may be changing significantly. again, this probably should not have come as a great surprise or shock to people following

it, but it seems to have gotten a lot of attention. there may be more space to pursue more energetic policy of engagement from obama with cuba. from obama point of view, i think there has been some steps made with the lifting of restrictions on travel and remittances of cuban-americans and making travel more flexible. there's a sense not much has changed from the latin perspective. perhaps in the second term, there may be more of a change moving forward. on this issue, we also have to look carefully at the composition of the new congress and some of the pieces moving around. some new members of congress, some members of congress that held important positions that will no longer be holding them in the next couple of years and the senator from texas, also a cuban-american.

congress obviously will be critical in this whole issue, but a lot to be done even without congress. there is no great incentive for the obama administration, i don't think, to do anything particularly dramatic on cuba. of course, i think one would expect continued caution really following developments within cuba to see what happens -- unless there is further change and reform that would open up space for more engagement and steps forward. finally on the drug issue, there is a mandate i mentioned at the oas has and there has been former presidents that have called for serious rethinking of u.s. drug policy, and now current presidents have made the statement clear -- most recently at the general assembly meeting in september at the u.n., and now we have interesting results from two

states here from washington state and from colorado. in addition to the many states -- i think there are 17 or 18 -- where marijuana can be used for medicinal purposes. in these two states, they can be used for recreational purposes. there we have the pressure from the region joined with some of the pressure and trends in shift in public opinion in the u.s., which i think will contribute an ad to greater pressure on the administration at the national level to rethink its policy on drugs, which is clearly having very negative effects or perceived to having negative effects in terms of crime, violence, and corruption in many countries in latin america. i think obama administration will probably say it has done some things to move forward on

this issue, talking about shared responsibility, but i think despite some changes in the discourse, the essential elements of the policy have been pretty unchanged until now. again, this does open some -- possibilities. the reaction in mexico will be particularly critical to see where this goes. president-elect peña nieto will be here at the end of this month. i'm sure this has got a lot of attention in the mexican press and among mexican commentators and i'm sure this will be raised and discussed with president obama when peña nieto is here. it is had complications to the u.s. policy in latin america. there is an opportunity that perhaps is greater than when we wrote the report in april to make some progress on these issues. there is more space, little more pressure.

at the same time, it is probably smart to keep expectations in check and under control. president obama, i think, has been shown to be pretty cautious when it comes to foreign policy. we still have a divided government and we also have to take care of this fiscal cliff that is looming, and that is the first order of business. not making any predictions, but i think it is just useful to see where we are and i do think the election results to have implications for some of the concerns that we outlined in this report. i will turn it over to peter and then margaret and manuel. >> thank you. a good introduction. let me start -- i want to focus on the pena nieto visit at the end of this month, which will really be the first major opportunity to see the extent to which the election really

has had any kind of impact on the way the u.s. is thinking about latin america or the way that latin america is thinking about the u.s.. this is an important meeting for both presidents. it has become somewhat routine now with the president elect of mexico to come to the u.s. before the inauguration. calderón did, foxx did. i do not remember back farther than that, but anyhow -- i was too young then. in any event, the visit itself opens up just a huge number of opportunities that probably -- they existed before. i don't want to say it did not exist before the election, but somehow they have been heightened by the election.

the obvious one that michael talked about was immigration, and the fact suddenly, as one commentator on tv said over the weekend, last it was a great week to be latino -- last week was a great week to be latino. suddenly, latinos became the centerpiece of commentary. all of the sudden, it became respectable again and republican party, at least, to talk about immigration policy d sudd amnesty was no longer a nasty word. in any event, we're hearing the committee is being formed, senator schumer and and senator gramm are coming to gather now to try to sort through -- together now to sort through comprehensive immigration reform, and their terms. prospects are better than they were certainly before the

election. they look significantly better than they had. of course, with regard to mexico, i personally do not think there is any issue that is more important for the quality of the relationship at this point. it is one of those issues that is sort of behind-the-scenes, whatever issue one is talking about, for many, if you know, in mexico, not only is u.s. immigration policy annoying and irritating, is offensive. the fence, the walling in, the immigrant -- which are largely mexican communities -- are talked about. this would, if there is a policy shift in any major way, i think would have an important impact.

as important, however, i think if one looks at the immigration issue -- and i'm not going into details now -- then it is also an economic issue. immigration -- manuel will talk more about that as well. in other words, the fact is, if you can bring 6 million mexicans out of the shadows and provide some legal status to them, they should earn more money, and it will begin to play a larger role in the u.s. economy. similarly, the admittances to mexico, which are now $25 billion a year, said immigration is a tremendously -- it is our young immigrant population that is sort of changing the age profile of our

labor force year to one that is much more productive than it would ordinarily be. some say immigrants, that the social security system depends on immigrants here. for mexico, what is happening at the same time in mexico, there is suddenly a huge potential place on economic reform. a wide range of issues, but let's just take one, which is of particular interest -- energy. if mexico can begin to open its oil exploitation, even modestly, to private sector, some foreign companies, that make a huge difference. mexico has the fourth largest quantity of shale deposits in the world. again, reform of their energy policy could open them.

what is interesting, and without going into detail, these were the two issues -- the labor migration, labor markets and energy, which were excluded from nafta because the more politically impossible to deal with. now all of the said they may be possible to deal with, which would have are really enormous profound effect on economic relations between the two countries if progress can be made on these two issues together. let me just say one other thing on the marijuana issue and legalization in washington and colorado. it is very interesting. the reaction from mexico was pretty quick. the reaction was, does mexico have to change its policy now? why are we defending a border

in trying to prevent importation of marijuana when in fact the u.s. has legalized it in two states? it is legal there, and we're sacrificing mexican lives to prevent it from getting there. i hope peña nieto does not, that attitude in mind, but the attitude that this legalization sort of signifies a trend in the u.s. population, sort of a changing cultural attitudes toward marijuana and drug policy, and that it is an opportunity to open up a real conversation about where drug policy should head. that would be a real serious conversation where both sides are examining their own policies. i think it might be possible to -- again, another opening that if mexico and other latin american countries are willing to sort of use this as a way to

say, look, this is really the time. two of your states have legalized it, have your population in polls suggest it is time for legalization, let's open up the conversation for alternative approaches. in any event, i think we should all focus very hard on the peña nieto visit, how the preparations go, what is discussed, and where it has left -- peña nieto takes office four days after the visit. thank you. >> thank you very much, peter. manuel? >> thank you. i think there is a message and question mark. we told you to take immigration seriously. something that has been coming up for the last three years.

there was some disbelief by many. and basically now, 7.5% of the u.s. population voted for obama of a particular ethnic group. we're talking about 12 million voters, 75% of which chose to vote for obama and considered the second most important issue to them was immigration. to some extent, there is a mandate. that mandate has become more validated, to some extent, by many people in the policy-making circles and political elites from both political parties and from a range of organizations, both immigration-related as well as other groups from civil rights organizations. to some extent, there is an alignment in the making. immigration public opinion has been shifting to the extent

that some polls show 65% of americans were more willing to provide some sort of a path to legalization for undocumented migrants but at the same time, the white house, the obama administration, has been making some changes toward some sort of immigration policy change that will give some relief to some immigrants. the question mark is, are ready for salsa? the fact of the matter is, this population has been growing not only in numbers, but has been forging a political capital of the past five years not only shifting the debate of the dream act, but before. they have recognized the political capital was significantly week, but there were very disorganized and did not have enough financial

system to mobilize. that has been changing to some extent. there are groups coalescing over immigration reform issues. the question mark left is, so what kind of reform? there is a concern that we are ready to talk. the issue is, what? it seems from the extent the base line of the dream act, nothing below that will be negotiable. the question is, what does this mean to let america? where this latin america fit into the equation? the immigration policy from one perspective is a national sovereignty issue, the reality is a domestic issue.

the united states has been conducting foreign policy relating to migration. one area is development, for example. u.s. aid and the state department has several approach to the development and tried to connect investment opportunities. latin america is one of them. the idea initiative, for example, is one of those initiatives. also working on immigration development issues. what are the implications for latin america in this context? one of them is, there is recognition in latin america that there seems to be an alignment of immigration reform. whatever that means to latin americans. there is at least an understanding of common interest over that.

the second issue is that some countries, mexico for example, say -- see this as an opportunity for corporations. -- for cooperation. the question is over a range of other issues. here comes the third issue, which is an opportunity and the relationship between u.s. and some of the mexican continents. the issues may have to deal with labor rights, human rights of migrants, but also may have to do with development issues as well as ways to cooperate in the event of immigration reform that and have an effect on the legalization of immigrants in the united states. it may also have to deal with people in dps.

for the most part, emerging both in the u.s. and latin america, the concerns it is the intersection between migration development today is far stronger than any other point in time. the process of legalization will have an effect on strengthening development in latin america. there is another issue that has some implications, and may have an effect on the way immigration reform might be considered. the fact immigration in general has changed significantly from where it was before in terms of high number of undocumented

migrants and low-skilled migration. today, immigration is completely -- increasingly high skilled, even at the level of the service industry. this may present an opportunity to engage governments in latin america and the u.s. over a strategy of corporation for labor aggression that is -- labor migration that is managed. with a growing number of people with higher skills preparing to migrate, the greater demand of migrants with high skills training for the opportunity for integrating any type of relations of reform. the whole idea of high skill. i think the main concern that remains is one of numbers. when people think about immigration reform, if you look at the fresh labor force and certain population groups. families with young immigrants. the population that is highly undocumented is actually the one that is old and has been in

the u.s. for a longer period of time. immigration reform and have an adverse affect on this group. -- may have an adverse affect on this group. what are the implications of this group? these are people that are more vulnerable, the ones that don't have health care, who face more difficulties in integrating into the u.s. as opposed to the younger cohorts. those are the implications or the meanings of development for latin america. >> thank you very much, manuel orozco.

. .

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] there are some differences between the states. this is the one category that is singled out for differential treatment. that sets it up for justice kennedy and his philosophy. that is my most hopeful expectation.

>> chad, could you -- are there risks in bringing the issues to the core?

the real opportunities come after that. the current house leadership is still the same and is still unwilling to move some of these -- or have an impact. my hope is the lesson out of the elections will open up a door to have those conversations. there have been people who have been helping to open the doors. look at what can has done. advocating, contributing money to these campaigns and having conversations with those he is close to. paul singer, of the biggest donors to the republican party, the finance chair from mitt romney is one of the single

greatest the lampas on the issue of equality and marriage equality. we could go on and on. the more we have leaders like that, that for such conversation, when those elected officials come to their doors one in meetings, money, fundraisers, that dialogue happens. that helps us further open the restores. we have to see what the opportunities are. some have been leases for a long time. my hope is we will have more that follow susan colin' lead. >> what about the democrats? are you going to put the pressure on harry reid to deliver on that?

>> it is a crime that we still do not have workplace protection in this country. the vast majority of americans supported. the vast majority of republicans and conservatives support it. it is outrageous that we have had some elected officials who have not allowed this to go forward. many countries have inclusive practices are fully inclusive. a number of states have moved forward -- where in than half of the states , you can be fired for being lgbt. it is outrageous. it is like legislating the golden rule in congress. it is such a simple concept but is the most american of values. >> what about harry reid getting to schedule a vote? >> it is my hope we will give leadership in the house have would be willing to move. we have to be smart and strategic.

let us not go forward with something that will not move. we need to push this forward. i hope this election was a signal to those who are unwilling to allow this to move forward, especially in the house of representatives. >> are ads important to lgbt families in america? if you are in lgbt family trying to be recognized, and have children, and do not have health care, and you are watching 50 states navigate through the implementation, it is more important during -- than harry reid implementing a vote. that is a bread and butter issue that impact families. watching secretary clinton's leadership in making lgbt human rights and what that means to our brothers and sisters in countries that fear persecution and death is a big deal to humans.

as we think of our gay agenda, court cases are important. winning more marriage states is big. not everybody is as fortunate as many of us in this room. we are obligated to look at on the local, state, and will levels. we have an obligation to speak to that. >> i want to add about employment discrimination. there are avenues that do not take us all the way of a federal executive order the president obama could and should sign. it would cover federal contracts so that if a business and wants

to get part of its income from the federal government, it should be willing to agree to not discriminate. the majority of federal contractors do have those policies. the extension to all federal contractors would extend anti-discrimination coverage to millions of people who do not have it. there are mechanisms through the agencies as well. the courts have repeatedly found gender identity coverage is covered under title 7. the eeoc in the past year issued a decision affirming that. with regard to gender identity. there are other arguments that are there and available in other ways to move.

we need congressional action because unless you have a definitive supreme court decision or an act of congress you cannot be sure. employment discrimination is such a fundamental thing that people need to be protected from. we need to be sure. there are other avenues. >> to add about the other issues -- same-sex couples with children in this country are economically challenged. they are more likely to be racial ethnic minorities. they are much more comments in the south and midwest than they are in new england and the west coast. those issues are lgbt issues. one of the great things about the last decade in getting these better data is being able to show that this diversity within the lgbt community that these

issues are not simply someone else's problem. >> on the affordable care act -- is that something the white house can help tax do they have the ability to pressure state on that issues? >> sure. secretary sibelius has been a tremendous friend. she laid out the regulations for the implementation of the affordable care act. she laid out a broad and both -- bold guidelines that basically said do not discriminate lgbt families. there is a lot of work to be done. it is being done by great partners that are doing smart work. part of the is the republican administrations for smart at times in and getting some anti-gay players into agencies where they were passing regulations that impacted us for a generation.

the obama administration has received little credit for imbedding thoughtful people who are open-minded who are willing to have conversations with us and realize one row can change people's lives. forever and for a generation of the lgbt people. across the administration, i think there are going to be demands for big bills. data collection is not very sexy although you think it is. [laughter] at the end of the second obama administration, our families are counted across of the agencies. it will change our ability to access resources, end discrimination in so many different ways. we have to make sure we do not lose sight of this.

>> another big thing in terms of some of the regulatory changes has been the impact on the transgendered community. the ability to get a pact for these basic things there has been some -- there have been minor tweaking of regulations and good inside people who knew how to do that. it has made a big difference in people's lives. >> let us talk about the president. do you expect in a second term it will be brought up the executive order. what do you -- did he sign that already? what is the white house telling about one that will happen? he could do the right now if he wanted. >> that is something that the president should do.

we have all urged it. we have considered it. the president deserves credit for all the progress we had in the first term. it is time to turn to the second term. it is at the top of everyone's list. that is not an end solution. it is an important step toward that goal. there is precedence from it for the civil rights movement. we will urge this president to do that. i do not know the timing. if i had that it would be a front-page story. all of us in the community will continue to push for that. there are a number of other things -- in the first term, the cabinet has increasingly looked like america in its diversity, including a historic number of lgbt members.

it is my hope we can have our first openly cabinet member. there are plenty of folks who are qualified for that. our ambassador is important. it is time we have a g8 or g20 openly lgbt ambassador or more than one. there are advancements that this president can still make on behalf of equality. that don't require a congressional movement. there are a number of other things we need congress to move while we have a president who will sign those. >> who are some of the folks that may be cabinet officials? >> i will stop short of going through a list of folks because we could all as one presidential

candidate once said, binders full. everyone in this room has a binder or too full of qualified candidates here in d.c. and around the country. >> signals are you getting from the administration that they will appoint a gay mid number? >> i have no confirmation as to who will be appointed where or when opening to come about. there will be openings. i am confident there are qualified lgbt candidates. >> can you describe what the white house's attention has been? >> no. i do not know. while i was in california, they made clear they would not move forward on that. i do not know why. it is my hope that they will. there was a long push encouraging the president and others to come out in favor of

marriage equality. the president said he was in evolution. i took him at his word. look at where he ended up. i am opt misk that he will ultimately issue that executive order because it is the right thing to do -- the timing of which i do not know. >> are there other changes that we can expect in the way that the census counts families? what else are you hearing? >> i think the issue of data has gotten quite a bit of attention. movement leadership groups are calling for better data collection. i think there is a chance -- i am not saying we will get a sexual orientation or gender identity question on the census. we will get more routine federal surveys asking those questions. a big issue for me would be to

get the national institutes of health -- one of the ways that we've made enormous headway in getting better information is when you apply for federal research you have to explain if you are not one to study racial and ethnic minorities or women, who had to explain why every time. one of the recommendations of the institute was to get nih to say if you submit a research proposal annual not study social orientation or gender identity you have to explain why not. that is an achievable goal in a relatively short time frame. there are several big federal surveys we are about to get sexual orientation on the national health interview secretaries. that is the biggest health survey in the country.

the other piece is the senses perot is moving toward better ways to count same-sex couples and their families and began to measure marriage in civil unions. there is no federal data at all right now. if doma were to be, that may become an important statistics agencies want to know. that is when you get attention when some federal agencies as they want to know that. in health care if we get elements of the health care law that has a specific impact that helps the argument for better data. >> really big issues that do not have an lgbt title matters in the family -- immigration reform. this affects all of us and our families and partners. the debate about the fiscal cliff.

if we do not favor of a sensible way to resolve the impact on so many of our families, it is humongous. we do not want to get ahead of ourselves and say we do not have serious for some are not just about us. the great challenge in the next two years is how we in bed ourselves in a real way and each debate that is smart and thoughtful. how do we use that relationship to build relations with progressives? >> i am hesitant to bring of the pentagon. don't ask don't tell is historic. it was passed and that had full lot that is removed from our books. we have to remember that our men and women who fought and died to this country do not have equal

benefits. there is a long way to go as it relates to the full benefits -- id cards, etc. there is a whole host of things so we need to make. as well as transgendered service. that is not a discussion. it is something that is important and needs to be addressed. all of these things we talk about -- there are real life people. it is not often you can pass a law that there are real life people that are immediately impacted and feel it. in this country, the vast

majority of people live in places where they are treated as second-class innocence. a young person growing up in america -- look at the three places where people spend most of their time -- home, school, and church. they are rejected in all three. encourage people that they can grow up with the same dreams as their peers. these false and demonstrated actions and successes matter to real-life people. it is felt in this country. it is important not get lost in a vote counts. >> we have time for audience questions. if there is someone who could help me -- my eyesight is terrible. i'll not be able to see if someone's hand is raised. if someone could help call on people.

>> i am a retired government employee. all of those other general agencies are affected by a same-sex partner benefits. i wish after 25 years of service that my partner could have my benefits. we need them. it is a basic need. what can we expect from the administration now and from hfc? >> first, you telling your stories just like that. it is how we are winning these battles. it is a shame it took us so long

to learn that lesson that harvey milk brought us. people listen and increasingly come about in support us. the story that you just told --people like you telling that story across the country were often times in this town especially the real life human impact is often forgotten. politics dominates. the discussion of politics dominates. that is why i was referencing -- it is the perfect follow-up of two real-life committed couples. it is outrageous that in this country we would treat our citizens and such an unequal with the impact survives. we will keep fighting day in and day out aggressively. i often talk about time matters.

and we found that with the prop 8 case, there was a bit of a delay. it took them 12 months to answer a question. we launched along with some other groups it tell us why you cannot wait. there were two eloquent men from palm springs. they had been together for almost 50 years. he expressed that he could not wait because he wanted to get married. his partner had been diagnosed with alzheimer's -- while they could both still remember these occasions. on the day that we finally had our hearing, his partner passed away the night before. they will never know that right. when we fought the pro 8 case, chris and sandy -- they are twins. they were entering high school. they graduate in june. their moms are not married. we have to tell this human story

as often as possible because that is what america cares about. we have to be smart about how we get these take juries and how we -- victories and how we get them as fast as we can. always remembering why and we fought. i cannot be more eloquent than you were. >> you talked about the coalitions that were put in place for the work that was done in this election season. how do you see our role as lgbt people in working other issues of oppression? where do you see that playing out? >> you are right. it is important. look at the fiscal cliff. sequestration. if we do not come to a sensible resolution, all people, including lgbt people, it is silly when you have these

discussions as though lgbt people are not part of the community impacted by health care or impacted by cuts in medical care, especially care for hiv and aids patients. look at where we are headed without a deal. we have to increasingly work together in coalitions in partnerships where we can come together. we do not have to agree on everything. finding the commonalities and working together. it is incredible what we can achieve when we do so. the movement has to challenge ourselves to do more of that. >> patrick, talk about what you see as a way that this community can work with the immigrant rights community on immigration as an example. >> sure. it is an issue that is not going away. for the next 10 or 15 years it will be one that will be part of

the political american landscape. there is a new generation of lgbt leadership looking at the way we do our business differently. we are starting to reflect the diversity in our community. we call on our leaders to say if you want to play a role in the emigration conversation, this is how we do with. we need to see that. look at the attack on women around women's issues. look at the outrageous language. we are talking about contraception and rape -- that is hard to imagine. that did not go away because candidates lost in a few states. there is something there that is very real.

our movement hasn't done a good job talking about the word "lesbian." it is a challenge for our leaders to give the broad movement counsel on how to engage. there will be a never ending number of opportunities in light of the country is about to face big complex issues after this election. we are not there today in knowing how to deal with those opportunities. >> another issue is the faith community. there are big operations to work with and within faith communities. that has been some fruitful partnership. >> i agree with you that last summer was a step forward and that a marked next year would be a step we have not taken in a few years and make sense to build momentum. you stopped short of saying a

full vote on the senate would be a good thing in terms of momentum for public education. they could do it. they are choosing not to. it allows our opponent to quietly oppose. why not push for that as well that when we to important public education by getting that vote? let them filibuster. >> important public education is what you say. all of these things take work. it is easy to say let us move forward and get a vote. we have a plan to win in a vote to win.

and if that is today, then let's move forward. i do think we have to be smart. we are asking for a lot. we want these things and we want them now. we have to work strategically. where can we get our next advantages? how quickly can we get them? i am not looking to set us up for losses. we need to continue the momentum. the reason we won these four was because we were smart and strategic. we won all four. that goes for a number of the other accomplishments. i am for an inclusive and fully-inclusive workplace protection coming out of this congress as soon as we can get it. >> i donate to hrc on a regular basis.

the arguments that really get me are the ones where there is a close race. as we feel the wind on our back, how will this afect funding in the real push for lgbt right? >> we have to have a reality check in terms of where we are. before tuesday, we had six states and the district of columbia. we have nine out of 50 and the district of columbia. momentum is on our side but we have a long way to go. we will have setbacks along the way. our opposition is trying to roll back things. in omaha, we have an inclusive workplace production. the opposition is going forward. there is a measure attempting to roll that back. you will see us having to be on the defensive in some places. on other victories, we have to remember our decrees were 52-48. without the support, would be

hard to achieve these victories. i look forward to the data we can glide into some of these. i do not think some of these people on these panels see these as easy glides. they are all hard work and require significant resources and time and energy across-the-board. >> what will this be in the future? >> that is contributed and raised. i love was proud to have been on the national finance committee for the president. as well as more than half a dozen other h.r.c. members and what we were able to contribute with our partners -- we endorse

233 candidates. we did well with the vast majority of them. we have losses here and there. particularly with moderate republicans that didn't win. we also put over $5.5 million in the cycle in the four states. i came in in june and worked my darnedest to direct as many resources as i could. more people noticed brad pitt's contribution and more people opened his e-mails than mine. i will continue to be as aggressive as i can be. this is a turning point. this is our moment. we have to keep fighting like hell to win these victories because the stakes are too high and the consequences of losses are significant.

>> say the supreme court takes one of these cases and it is decided in our favor and 41 states have marriage equality. what do you say to the opposition's suggestion that this will become the next abortion? >> if the supreme court strikes down a section, it does not affect a state's law. it affects whether the federal government must recognize a marriage that is recognized in a state. it means that couples who marry in massachusetts or other states that recognize marriage whether those marriages will be recognized by the federal government. it does not do anything to force states that do not recognize same-sex marriages to take that step.

it only means of the federal government policy has to be to recognize the marriages that any given state recognizes. i do not think it will prompt actually a backlash because it is limited in that way. it was framed -- the cases were framed clearly. they involve things like social security or federal employee benefits for federal income tax. or other issues that are specific to federal law. i do think however that -- in a lot of the examples that have come up, that if the supreme court does strike down just the section, it will have many ripple effects. it is framed in a way that is limited to federal policy. federal policy circulates throughout many areas of law and

many areas of our laws. it is important to remember that the doma cases are targeted at a specific aspect of, of but i think that if we win one of the cases that do ramifications will be quite broad. not in the sense that states will be forced to change their laws about marriage but in the sense that if individuals do want to choose to marry, the ramifications for federal law will be quite extensive and a lot of areas will be affected. the health insurance exchanges, immigration exchanges, etc. >> the most powerful case for marriage is marriage itself. we have got on our side. whether it was a court case in massachusetts or vermont or a

big legislative victory in new york, and all of these cases regardless of what the root of full equality was, the moment your neighbor saw your marriage, and locusts and plague didn't show up the next day, all of a sudden looking at the demographics. i am hopeful whether is a dramatic one on the federal level or 10 more big ones on the state level, every victory comes

with energy and interest. they see their neighbors. it is ok. that is a hopeful sign for us. >> gary is the numbers guru. i don't think there is any in evidence the numbers that will back that up either. if you look at the demographic data on support for marriage equality in the eight rebounds. it is difficult to make the case that we will see anything but continued movement. the question is the pace of the movement. >> what is surprising is how the big difference is between young and old. i never completely agreeing that how people's attitudes when 25 will be the same when they are 50. if the margins are so large, then that is right. >> talk about the changes in the african-american community, because that is one issue where the churches in california mobilized in 2008 and did not seem to come to fruition this time.

>> the evidence suggests in maryland, where you had a sizable african-american community in the electorate, that it was a 50-50 proposition. clearly in the past it had been not necessarily that close. but i think in general in minority communities, one thing to remember about these communities is they are younger and more female than the white population. both of those things favor particularly marriage. women, dramatically more likely -- substantially more likely to support marriage equality than men. and younger people more likely. with the latinos, you are getting consistent pulling a majorities for marriage equality. part of that is a purely demographic phenomenon. they are younger and more female.

that is also starting to be true in the african-american community as well. they are relative to the white population, every ethnic minority in this country follows that basic demographic. >> we have time for one more question. >> you answered it. i was interested in -- actually my question is more along the lines of what strategies do you think helped respond to the attempt to divide in the state of maryland the african-american versus lgbt divide? >> i was on a panel yesterday with a woman who talked about being in on -- obviously there was a lot of engagement with african-american pastors, many of them were not going to come out in support of this, but the conversation happened.

what everyone has been saying, it does not always mean you get the support there, but you begin to get these civil conversations about the issue, and her argument is that is what one of the things that happened in maryland. >> if you look at maryland, it is 27% the african-american turnout in maryland, and there was a significant movement. ben jealous of the naacp stood up and was a full partner. another reverend, one of the biggest ministers in maryland, was not just on our side, but was campaigning day in and day at and talking to his congregation and talking to folks across that stayed on this issue. those are two examples. >> the pictures, at least if darlene is correct, her argument was the picture on most of the literature was michelle obama,

that her support was clearly used in the campaign. >> i think a combination of those things has moved us forward. thanks very much to the panel. a great discussion. thank you. [applause] thanks everyone for coming. good night. >> today on "washington journal" we'll talk about the republican party and hispanic voters following the 2012 election with the hispanic steering committee chairman for mitt romney's presidential campaign and then a look at policy agenda and political goals with justin ruben. and later, a discussion on the new leadership in china and what it means for u.s./china

relations. also a preview of president obama's trip to asia. "washington journal" live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >>truman had two big puzzles in his life. the first was this is a man who got into politics having failed in many businesses as a young man. tom way to get into politics in -- the only way to get into politics was a machine. two machines. he picked up the pender gast machine, the most corrupt and often vicious machine. i said to myself, how did this happen? how could he possibly work in this machine in local politics? that was the first thing i had to work out. the second, of course, is what we all know about and that is how did he come to use the atomic bomb?

what was behind the decision? what's the story about the adomic bomb before he became president and then when the decision was on his desk? it is still a controversial story and i wanted to know more about it. >> from his early life through his presidency, aida donald looks at the life of harry truma. >> now a squgs advisors to president obama's and mitt romney's campaign in the 2012 election. they talk about voter turnout and comparisons to the 2008 election. this is about 25 minutes. >> my name is justin smith. i'm the president of thrack media company. i'm delighted to welcome you to the washington ideas forum

convened as many of you know, the atlantic has been in the businessor journalism and ideas for a very long time, since 1857 to be exact, but it wasn't until nine years ago that we got serious about creating the most interesting and ambitious live forums on politics, business, science and technology and the arts. thanks to the vision of the accomplished author, walter isaacson who approached the owner of the atlantic, david bradley about partnering to create a new event called the aspen ideas festival. in less than a decade, the festival chrks takes place every summer in the beautiful aspen campus in colorado has become a leader in global events arena. due to to its success, we

decided four years to go take elements of that great show on the road and with the partnership of jim duff and the museum, the washington ideas forum was born. over the next two days you'll hear some of the world's greatest journalists interviewed, discuss debates, topics as the election aftermath, global health, education reform, the the future of china and many more subjects. so if you will bear with me, i would like to offer some words of appreciation for some of the organizations and people that made this event possible and it starts very much at the top of the list with a big thank you to margaret carlson who is the editorial director of the washington forum. she is not only wonderful and talented but she has been the creative force behind the vision of this event from the very beginning. thank you margaret. [applause] the event would also not be really possible and i was looking for an adjective that captured this gentleman well. i came up with this one,

electric. he is with the atlantic now. of course the museum's shelby coffee who has been a key ark integrity of this event. this year we have been doing something different. we welcome a new partnership with the harvard politics, who helped carry our insights program track and i would like to thank tray grayson. now i would like to thank our underwriter who is made this event possible. bank of america, comcast, exxon mobil, emirates, thompson reuters and united technology and supporting underwriters, the american federation of teachers and for drinks tonight, well deserved drinks at the reception, the underwriter is google. a few housekeeping notes. we're going to run the program

straight through without breaks so you can infer that what means. please silence your cell phones. this side just your ringer. we want you to keep your cell phones to actually tweet to the hash tag ideas forum. for those watching via the atlantic.com live stream. thank you all for coming and please enjoy the show. [applause] >> thanks everybody for coming this afternoon. i hope you enjoyed the morning. welcome to our fox and friends set. we'll call it margaret and

friends. jen psaki for the obama campaign and kevin madden for the romney campaign are joining us. now they are going to join us and tell us what life is really like and john dickerson is going to get it out of them. right, john? what goes on behind the curtain? when the bus stops rolling? john dickerson, cbs news? >> the best online magazine other than the atlantic slate. >> thank you, margaret. i can't tell whether we're in a living room or a therapy room. >> we have 20 minutes until the shuttle departs for cancun or

something. let's start with both of you worked for these candidates in the last campaign and you now are here for this one. jen, what was different this time around? >> nothing. [laughter] you know, it was entirely different from the beginning. there was a lot that has been written about how it was different. there was this amazing wave of enthusiasm and excitement. this time was no question harder fought. there were harder days. there wasn't a wave at the end, as we all know. a very -- i'll call them a very, very senior administration official. this is a very good aanalogy for it. the first campaign was like being in a relationship. everything is gleeful. you're happy. you don't see anything wrong in the person and you ride the wave of happiness. the second campaign was after

you have been married for a few years, had a couple of kids, maybe you had some squabbles, some financial disputes, but at the end of the day, you love the person that much more. that's how i think a lot of us felt. you know, that we -- it was harder fought but it felt that much sweeter at the end. >> i found that the speed was very different from the 2008 campaign. i remember in the 2008 campaign just on how jen and i view our jobs, in the 2008 campaign, i had signed up for facebook for the first time just so i could see what governor romney's facebook page looked like. that's how i found out about facebook. two months later, i logged back on because it had gotten hacked into. >> you had friends from grammer school looking for you. >> yes. farmville. we also didn't have twitter. i also remember calling up a guy before i worked for governor

romney, i worked for john boehner. i called up our didge cal -- digital guy and said tell me about twitter and he said you don't need to know that. that is not going to take off. so much of what we did was driven from the bottom up through twitter. even when toivens plane, we would go -- even when i was on the plane, jen was on a much bigger plane called air force 1. i was on hairforce 1. by the time i came back to the front of the plane i would see on twitter i already made news. >> when you say people, you don't mean people. you mean reporters. >> or people. [laughter] >>that was on the -- free to be you and me c.d. reporters are people.

but this was kind of backstage conversation you were watching play out on twitter. sometimes real people. it was more important for you how the journalists were using twitter. >> it became an incredible newsing a gator. you could see now like t.p.m. more left leaning. see what they are saying. see what folks on the right are saying. folks in the middle are supposed to be saying. what the outside groups are saying and you sort of got a good snapshot of where the dialogue was going for the day. what i found was quite stunning was with the speed. i worked on the 2004 campaign as well and in president bush's re-elect. you had until about 3:30 in the afternoon to get your message together a